ArticleBMC public health2022
Examining the place of the female condom in india's family planning program aqualitative investigation of the attitudes, opinions of key stakeholders in Pune, India.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith overpopulation contributing to the depletion of planetary resources, the high rates of unintended pregnancies in India are a cause for concern. Despite the free supply of contraception options within India's national family planning initiatives, women are generally offered hormonal options as temporary spacing methods. However, female condoms, a much neglected but potent woman initiated, non-hormonal multipurpose prevention device, are yet to be considered for inclusion in India's contraceptive cafeteria. Thus, we aim to examine the place of female condoms among the contraceptive options, by analysing the perceptions of key stakeholders regarding its advantages and disadvantages, along with their opinions on how female condoms should be promoted.
methodsWe used purposive sampling to recruit and interview potential users and dispensers of the female condom. The interview participants visited or worked at family planning clinics in Pune at Smt. Kashibai Navale Medical College and General Hospital (SKNMC-GH), its urban and rural outreach clinics, and at Saheli (a non-governmental organisation for female sex workers). We conducted semi-structured interviews and coded our data inductively.
resultsWe interviewed 5 rural women, 20 urban women (including 10 female sex workers), 5 male partners of female sex workers, and 5 family planning healthcare providers. Nearly half (12/25) of the women we interviewed, said that they were eager to use female condoms in the future. Many participants perceived female condoms to be an instrument to empower women to be in control of their sexual and reproductive lives (15/35), and that it provided user comfort and confidence (4/35). Their perceived disadvantages are that they are relatively more expensive (6/35), users have limited experience (9/35), and women who buy or use them may be stigmatised and feel embarrassed (4/35). Yet, nearly three-quarters of potential users (21/30) and most healthcare providers (4/5), were confident that female condoms could become popular following extensive promotional campaigns, interventions to improve availability and access, and initiatives to enhance the knowledge of female users.
conclusionsFemale condoms have garnered support from both users and dispensers and have the potential to be widely adopted in India if family planning initiatives which increase awareness, knowledge, and access are systematically undertaken as with other contraceptive options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.